1 167 THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2:30 o'clock, Friday, April 16, 1971 THRONE SPEECH DEBATE MR, SPEAKER: We are continuing the debate on the Throne Speech. Member for St. Matthews. MR. WALLY JOHANNSON (St. Matthews): The Honourable Mr. Speaker, may I first extend my congratulations to you upon your election by the Assembly to the highest post it can offer. I trust you will find it more rewarding then your previous job as Government Whip which was a rather thankless and many times frustrating job. In recent days I think you've done a remarkable job of keeping order among a rather garrulous and unruly lot, and I include the members on our side among that group. I feel confident that you will represent us very well. May I also extend my best wishes to the new Deputy Minister -- Deputy Speaker, pardon me -- I'm sorry he's not here because he would appreciate the congratulations, the Member for Winnipeg Centre. I should also like to congratulate the new members of the Executive Council - the Minister of Consumer, Corporate and Internal Affairs who is also absent and the Minister Without Portfolio. Finally, I should like to congratulate the mover and the seconder who are here, the mover and the seconder of the Address in Reply to the Throne Speech. Mr. Speaker -- (Interjection) -- Speaker. Oh yes, I already congratulated him on his assumption to the office of Deputy Mr. Speaker, I should like to congratulate the Leader of the Official Opposition upon his election as Leader of the Progressive Conservati e Party. I am confident that we can look forward to seeing his face in the front row on the opposition benches for a long long time, another 20 years or so. and I'm sorry he's not here to hear them. Mind you, Mr. Speaker, I did have a few words of caution for him In one respect at least - and there aren't many respects, his party is radical - they believe in following the policies of the Committee of Public Safety which ruled France during the early and rather revolutionary phase of the French Revolution. France at that time was threatened by -- (Interjection) -- Well, there's nothing like learning from history. The opposition benches could do a little learning. The Committee of Public Safety was ruling France at this time and France was threatened by foreign invasion and the army generals who were a conservative crew were losing battles. -- (Interjection) - I'm not a Conservative. The Committee of Public Safety adopted a very good policy. They cut off the heads of any general who lost a battle and pretty soon there were no French generals who lost battles. Now I don't know if the Progressive Conservatives in Manitoba could afford that sort of policy; I don't know if they have that many heads that they can spare. Mr. Speaker, I would also like to recommend for the amusement and light reading of the Leader of the Official Opposition a recent publication by a Conservative Member of Parliament, Robert Coates, entitled "Night of the Knives. " The Leader of the Opposition should learn to guard his back and also to win elections. In spite of advice - wise advice I might add - from the Premier, the previous Leader of the Official Opposition did not learn those simple rules for any leader of the Conservative Party. May I also extend my congratulations to the new Leader of the Liberal Party who is unfortunately not with us. After his able leadership during the by-elections, I feel confident that he will lead the Liberal Party grandly and magnificently, charge of the light brigade, into oblivion. a good deal of Lord Cardigan. like Lord Cardigan led the In fact the Leader of the Liberal Party reminds me When Lord Cardigan became Colonel of the Eleventh Hussars he lavishly outfitted -- (Interjection) -- Hussars, pardon me, I stand corrected -- he lavishly outfitted his regiment with cherry-coloured tights, tight pants -- (Interjection) -- Lord Cardigan -- jackets and capes of royal blue trimmed with gold braid, high fur hats with brilliant plumes. of the new Liberal Party. Now that sounds a good deal like the image that has been constructed recently In Ste. Rose and in St. Vital during the by-elections the Leader of the Liberal Party led his tro9ps into battle just like Lord Cardigan led the charge of the Light Brigade into the mouths of big cannons. Lord Cardigan had the heart of a lion. Unfortunately, he had no brain and the results were a bit disasterous. I trust the Liberal Leader will continue what he describes as his successful leadership and I trust also that under his leadership Liberal MLA1s will soon be as easy to find in Manitoba as dinosaurs, and they're not very easily found.
2 168 April 16, 1971 (MR, JOHANNSON cont'd.) Mr. Speaker, it is traditional that in the Throne Speech a member sings the praises and glories of his constituency. However, in my constituency I have no winter fairs so I can't eulogize upon heavy and light horse competitions; I have no lakes or streams so I can't extoll upon the beauties of the natural surroundings of my constituency. -- (Interjection) -- No bulls in my com;;tituency. Now the Blue Bombers do play in my constituency in the Winnipeg Stadium and I'm afraid I can't say very much in praise of their exploits. However, in view of the proclivities of some members and including some of the Blue Bombers, perhaps I should give the members a guided tour of the watering holes in my constituency. Even the most thirsty members will find a magnificent selection of bars in my constituency. I would even encourage freedom of choice. Mr. Speaker, there has been a good deal of opposition criticism of late about featherbedding in our civil service, particularly from the Honourable Member for Fort Garry. He pursued this matter rather vehemently, claiming that our government has added some 700 plus members to the civil service and he raises the spectre of an uncontrollable mushrooming of government bureaucracy, and yet the opposition is a bit ambivalent on this matter. Whenever a rumour begins to float through the bar of the Manitoba Club that some civil servant is leaving, the opposition raises the spectre of a bloody purge of the civil service. I would. like to discuss our housing program in view of opposition criticisms. They've I criticized us for growth of bureaucracy; they've also criticized us for lack of action on a good many things. I'd like to discuss this in view of the opposition criticism and as an example of how a major government program carried out our government's objectives. Under the Conservative regime, which fortunately ended 20 months ago, the Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation consisted of four employees - four. That would have made the Member for Fort Garry very happy. The Corporation occupied a couple of tiny rooms. Mind you, under the previous regime that was adequate. After all, the Conservatives had no housing policy. In a decade they built largely on the initiative of the City of Winnipeg about 500 units of public housing. That averages out to less than 50 a year - and this is from a government which consisted of men whom the Member for Sturgeon Creek would describe as aggressive, vigorous salesmen types. And this was at a time when the TED Report, the Bible of the Leader of the Official Opposition, recommended the construction of 18, OOO units of new housing to replace that housing which would have to be demolished, and the construction of 18, OOO more units to eliminate overcrowding. TED stated that 36, OOO units would have to be built between 1970 and 1980, in that decade, 36, OOO units. It was this huge housing need which we inherited from the dynamic and aggressive government of the previous regime. The Metro Urban Renewal Study of 1967 estimated that during the decade of the 170's Metro Winnipeg would require over 40, OOO units of new housing, of which roughly a little more than half, over 20, OOO would have to be some sort of public housing. Since we took office we've expanded the staff of the Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation and now there are almost 20, I understand, almost 20 employees, five times as many as the Conservatives had - five times. -- (Interjection) -- I'm sorry the Member for Fort Garry is not here, that would have given him an apoplectic fit. Mind you, mind you we now do have a housing program for the first time. We will be building approximately 20, OOO units of housing with some federal money, some federal money which is loaned to us, we'll be building some 20, OOO units over the next five years. There'll be 2, 500 approximately built this coming year. It would have been 3, 600 only the Federal Government - and it's the Federal Liberal Government - in its infinite wisdom cut our CMHC appropriation by some $20 million. Now the Throne Speech sets out the goals of the government raising the standard of living of Manitobans, improving the distribution of income for those on moderate, low or fixed incomes. And the eradication of slums has always been a part of the program of our party. I think our public housing program illustrates how we're attempting to achieve these objectives. It illustrates that a government can be both idealistic in its goals and pragmatic in its methods. The capital cost of any housing built in Manitoba is a benefit to the province rather than a charge against it, the debt itself retiring and at the same time the new construction generates income and taxes, economic activity and social uplift to those who have never known before adequate housing. To put it simply, the province makes money through a public housing program. The speed-up in our public housing program this last winter, forms a major part of our government's effort to provide jobs and economic activity during a period of federally induced unemployment and economic recession.
3 April 16, (MR. JOHANSSON cont'd. ) Now I'm convinced, I'm convinced that the Conservative Party with its respect for tradition and with its pragmatism should support the creative use of the Crown as shown in this government's housing program. I would think that the Member for Lakeside, for example, who I think is a man who is truly a Conservative in many of the best senses of the word, should support a program like this. I think he's much more of a Conservative than some of the members behind him in his caucus who continually spout free enterprise dogma which in many cases has very little to do with Conservatism. Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Official Opposition has stated that his party intends to provide constructive opposition, a positive alternative to the government. The Honourable Member for Portage who used to be House Leader of what used to be the Liberal Party in this House has stated that his group intends to offer positive alternatives to government policies. In view of this I feel that the House would appreciate hearing the policy position of the groups opposite on the question of aid to separate schools. They've pressed the government for its position. If the opposition wishes to be a positive and constructive alternative I should like to hear a precise statement of what the position of the Conservative Party is on financial aid to private and pa;rjchial schools. What is the position agreed upon by the Conservative Party and its caucus; for example, I would like to hear -- I don't know if their conventions decide policy or not, I'm not sure who -- For example, I would like to hear from the Honourable Member for Pembina, I would like to hear from the Honourable Member for Pembina whether his party, the party that he campaigns for in Pembina in his constituency, supports aid which would allow any group of parents, any group of parents to pay school taxes to a school of their own choice, I should like to hear him tell us, for example, whether he would allow a group of Communists or aetheists of commune hippie parents to pay school taxes, to pay school taxes to the schools of their own choice. Would the Honourable Member for Swan River -- and unfortunately he's not here -- would the Honourable Member for Swan River allow these groups, Communist, etcetera, to set up Communist or aetheist schools? Would the Honourable Member for Rock Lake who gave us a dissertation on academic freedom yesterday, would the Honourable Member for Rock Lake allow parents to pay their school taxes to a free school where permissiveness runs rampant, where publications such as the one he was looking at yesterday would be mild stuff? Would he allow a free school to be set up -- (Interjection) - Certainly. MR, SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Rock Lake on a question. MR. EINARSON: I'd like to know, could you tell me if the taxpayers are not paying money in universities where some professors may be preaching communism and what it stands for? In view of your comments that you have just been making, I'm wondering, could you tell the members of this House whether tax money today is not being used to pay professors, some professors at some universities to preach the ideologies of communism? MR, JOHANNSON: I would agree with you. In fact there are courses on Marxism and Communism. I, for example, studied a course on European History which examined the entire course of European history from 1789 to the present the professors taught us the doctrines of a good number of movements - including capitalism, yes. Now, I think after listening to the Honourable Member for Charleswood yesterday, that the things that I've been mentioning are implications of a statement. MR, LAURENT L. DESJARDINS (St. Boniface): Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the honourable member would permit a question? MR. SPEAKER: The Member for St. Boniface on a question. MR. DESJARDINS: This question, Mr. Speaker, just for clarification. I was waiting to see the connection in my honourable friend comparing the schools that he mentioned when he was questioning some of the members in the opposite side to the separate schools? Is that the intention? And private schools? It's just clarification that I... MR, JOHANN SON: No. No, Mr. Speaker, the great majority of the private schools right now are religious in nature and I was talking about schools that could be set up, For example, there used to be a school which I understand at least, preached Marx Leninism in the North End. That school folded because of lack of financial support and a school like that certainly could possibly emerge again if state support were provided to all types of private schools. Finally, I would like to know whether the Honourable Member for Charleswood was
4 170 April 16, 1971 (MR. JOHANNSON cont'd. )..... speaking for himself or his party yesterday in his plea for aid to private schools. If the Conservative Party wishes the people of Manitoba to take it seriously -- and obviously from their performance in the two by-elections the people don't take it very seriously now -- if the Conservative Party wishes the people of Manitoba to take it seriously, they must make clear their position as a party to the people of Manitoba. Their party after all governed Manitoba for more than a decade and its only policy on this question, and some of the members opposite were in government that formulated this policy, their only policy in this question was the shared services plan. Individual members of the Conservative caucus are now stating by implication that the Conservative solution was a non-solution, that it didn t solve the problem. If these members want us to take seriously their present pleas for action to make up for their inaction while they were in office for over a decade, I think they owe an obligation to the people of Manitoba to take a precise party and caucus decision on this vital matter. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Riel. Question. The Honourable Member for Charleswood. MR. MOUG: Is that all you have to co:ritribute to the Legislature? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Riel. Or is there another question? MRS. TRUEMAN:.,. question, Mr. Speaker... MR, SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Rouge. MRS, TRUEMAN:,.. if the member would submit to a question. When he mentioned all the housing that had been developed since his party took power, how much of that had actually been started during the Conservative regime? It's almost two years you've coasted. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Riel. MR, CRAIK: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and may I join with the others in wishing you well in your undertakings. I know that you have a very difficult job ahead of you in restoring a degree of decorum to the House that has been lacking on many occasions in the past and is very difficult to rectify when in fact it exists in that condition. However, I think you're off to a good start and I'll attempt to give you every assistance that I can but inadvertently will fall off the wagon now and then like the rest of the members of the House and I'm sure you'll remind me when I do. May I also congratulate the new attendants that we have in the House. It was very pleasing, particularly yesterday, to see our new lady attendants in the House go through the onerous responsibility of first roll-call, I, during the course of being in the House haven't seen anyone do it just quite as well as it was done yesterday and I'm sure that bodes well for this move and I congratulate them very much. Also, Mr. Speaker, congratulations are in order to the others who fill new responsibilities on the government side of the House, and before leaving this topic I want to join the others as well in paying tribute to those who were instrumental in providing us with a very successful Centennial year,. and again particularly thanks to the late Maitland Steinkopf who gave unstintingly of his own time and his own personality and has to be one of the most respected citizens that this province has seen in many a decade and served us well for many years and I think particularly in our Centennial year. And, of course, along with him, the former Minister of Cultural Affairs who now sits in the House, the Member for Wellington, who put in a very difficult year, I'm sure, as well, in helping us toward a successful Centennial. Mr. Speaker, with those few remarks I want to make a few comments about the topics that are contained in the Throne Speech, and some that are not contained in the. Throne Speech. I think that it's evident in the Throne Speech that the government has come to the position of paying at least lip service to the economic development requirements of the province which are critical to our well-being and which have been lacking in the past performance of the government and I can only hope that the intentions indicated in the Throne Speech are in fact going to bear fruit because the economic community, or the economic feelings of the community, particularly the business community in Mamtoba, are not very buoyant as a result of the attitude of the government to the private sector of this province. That goes almost without saying to the various portions of the private sector that contribute so valuably to our economic life. I think to repeat again words that have already stated in the House, that the private sector by and large is responsible for the jobs, the employment, the innovativeness that is
5 April 16, (MR. CRAIK cont'd. )..... required to provide an on-going and health economy. I think government's role has been, is, and should continue to be that of the catalyst in the mix of the private and public sectors of our community. A mixed economy principle is with us, has been for some time and is a good one that can provide a good balance and one which I personally support, but I think the interpretation of where the balance lies is the difference in philosophy of the political parties that we have in Manitoba and I think there is a difference. Quite frankly, I agree with the Minister of Mines and Natural Resources who made the statement in the House the other day that there should be a polarization of political thought in Manitoba and I have no inhibitions about exploring such a polarization. The main issue, I think, that is before the Legislature this year is the issue of total amalgamation or non-amalgamation within the Greater Winnipeg area. We have the first bill before us that sets the stage for introduction of the plans of the government in this direction. I represent a constituency that is affected very directly by the government plans if they are as stated in the White Paper which was circulated. I must say that I felt that the White Paper, like many others, was not a well written paper. I think particularly the part that said that it was obvious that we suffered from a lack of participation. I thought this was a very ironic statement to be made in light of what can be expected from the amalgamation that is proposed to replace it. I would say further that the remarks of the Member for Elmwood I thought were a very very bad misinterpretation of the true facts. I think his interpretation was wrong; I think that the results that would follow that interpretation, if he is reflecting government policy, are going to be, the actions would be very ill-founded. I think what we want out of our urban government is participation, democratic government at a time now when we also want the least possible cost for government administration. The proposals of the government that are indicated in the White Paper are not going to remedy any problem in that direction that now exists. The Minister of Finance and his assistants from the Cabinet held their many meetings throughout the urban area. They were held in St. Vital. The Member for Elmwood says that the turnout was very much influenced by the political actions of particular interest groups at the meeting and therefore was a biased meeting. This couldn't be further from the truth; and if the Member for Elmwood is not prepared to recognize democratic, democracy at its best, then he's missed the best chance of his lifetime that he had in the hearings that were held - if you can call them hearings - throughout the urban area. The people that presented themselves at the particular meeting in St. Vital, in numbers 800 to 1, OOO people that were reported, were there because like no other issue that has been before them in recent times, they felt vitally affected by the decisions that were being made by the government. Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, there has been much talk of the recent results of the byelections in Ste. Rose and St. Vital and I congratulate ihe respective winners of those byelections. I must say to the government that it is my feeling that they won the St. Vital seat not as a result of their position on amalgamation but in spite of it. Mr. Speaker, that s my interpretation, I think it's supported by many others who are reasonably familiar with the school of thought that was predominant during the period of the by-election at that particular time, and the government did not win votes in St. Vital because of their position on the amalgamation issue; rather they lost votes on the amalgamation issue. The results of the by-elections, Mr. Speaker, again to bear out the requirements for a realignment of political thought came up with the net result, the only conclusion that you could draw, that 64 percent of the electorate were against the main principle that was placed before them by the New Democratic Party, and the main issue of about three issues in the by-election was total amalgamation, and the 64 percent of the people have basically told the government that they are against the principle of total amalgamation Mr. Speaker, I'd like to say why they are against it. They're against it only partly because the government will not try and tell them what the costs are going to be of an amalgamated city. They're against it because by nature they have grown up with a degree of independence, that is, a majority of the population that has been there for several years and most of them, the majority of the population has been, that s a community with a fairly small turnover in that particular constituency, and over that period of time they have developed in their local government that degree of independence that allowed them to go before their local government to solve many of their local problems and in so doing they had many difficulties and have been very free and very prone to express their thoughts very vociferously. But this doesn't necessarily mean that they're against having their own local government. Over the same period of
6 172 April 16, 1971 (MR, CRAIK cont'd. )..... time they developed a reserve fund, a rainy day fund, that in cash value is significant to that particular area, population of 30 some thousand people, a reserve fund of close to $2 million, They have also in recent years developed some of their own land and have adopted a policy for the public development of land under the total planning umbrella of the Metropolitan Corporation which they by and large agree with, and when they disagree with it they make their feelings known and the differences are resolved but by and large which they accept, and find no basic fundamental generic disagreement with the principle of having their overall planning governed by a Metropolitan government, but working progressively towards the best interests of the public by reserving their public land for development in the interests of the public so if there is a capital gain, it goes to the public. The net value of these lands again is of the order of $2 million in that area. These figures are very rough but this gives us a total value of somewhere in the order of $4 million, I find the Minister of Finance is not particularly interested in this and he wishes not to hear this part, because he now has a bill before the Legislature_ that wants to freeze these long accumulated earnings of the average citizen of St. Vital, who is not a wealthy person on the average, but is in the lower income area; four million dollars alone in accumulations of cash reserves or property reserves that they have accumulated, They didn't have the benefit of forethought that the Mayor of Winnipeg had a year ago to sell off any of their property such as the Winnipeg Auditorium, They are now faced with a bill by the government that is going to take their reserves from them. This is the main thrust of the bill which the Minister has introduced. It does the same not only to St. Vital but does it to all the other municipalities as well. In other words, the earned reserves that a municipality has accumulated are going to be taken from them b\\t there is going to be no consideration of the hardships they went through over the past 10 or 15 years to accumulate those reserves. How does the government plan to make restitution for that, that belongs by and large to a community of people that have lived there that long and the government has no right at this time to take those reserves from them. I suggest, Mr. Speaker, that this is only-a minor part of the argument, but it's one that everybody understands because it's dollars and cents. The more important part of the argument is the loss of democratic participation that people have enjoyed in that area, whether it is arguments over the pros and cons of whether the water flows one way on a street or another, at least they can solve it with their local council and do not have to have it solved at the beaucratic level. I think there is a fundamental difference that can be identified and that is going to be lost in the proposal of the government. The difference is whether the politicians, the elected person -- I shouldn't say politician, because I don't think political activity as we sometimes interpret it is properly applied to the local situation, because bigp politics has never played a significant part in local government to the extent that it has in the suburbs, the extent that.it has in Winnipeg. -- (Interjection) -- Well, Mr. Speaker, that is an expected comment from the Member from Elmwood who has never sat or watched a local elected body in action. However, there are members on the government side who have and when they speak in favour of amalgamation, and I look specifically at the Minister of Education who spoke in our area, he speaks without conviction when he speaks in favour of total amalgamation, because he knows that a great lot is being lost in the proposal that is being brought forth by the present government. The basic difference, Mr. Speaker, in the operation of local government and metropolitan government is that at the local level, the elected official has still some voice that he can exercise on behalf of the constituents that he represents, and the difference is at the Metropolitan level of government, well intentioned that the people may be that are elected there, they are run by the bureaucracy, and that is not true at the local level, and what we are all searching for is the proper balance. But I submit that what we will end up with in the Metropolitan area with a 48 member council proposed by the White Paper, is this loss of representation, effective representation, just by the sheer weight of the bureaucracy which they are going to have under them and the lack of effective action that is going to be achieved on the little problems, not the big problems, but the little problems that bother people most in areas such as the one that I represent. I think also that the government might well learn from what has happened in other areas. Within the last two or three weeks we have found that in the city of Los Angeles, the police force has been broken up into three distinct areas of control. We find the same thing, Mr. Speaker, in other large urban areas in the United States and in North America and I think that we might well learn that many of the things that are wanting to be experimented with here, are
7 April 16, (MR. CRAIK cont'd. )..... in fact found to be an undesirable situation in other areas. I must say that I was satisfied, pleased that the government did not see fit to apply their centralization plans to education. I think that this was a - somewhere wisdom was brought to bear, whether it was through the Minister of Education or not, perhaps it was - but wisdom was brought to bear here in sparing the educational system in the Greater Winnipeg area from the centralization plans that they are trying to impose on the local levels of government. I think that the effect in the education area would probably have been even more detrimental and backward moving than they are in the field of centralization of municipal government. I trust, Mr. Speaker, that the final decisions are not made with regard to the decisions on total amalgamation, becau s e I sincerely believe that they will find that if this were put to a referendum that in the suburbs at least it would be soundly and roundly defeated - including Transcona. Well I take from the Minister of Labour's remarks that he has all the fire power he needs now to put through his inflexible position with regard to total amalgamation. I think that the Minister of Labour might well speak to one of his favourite constituents, the Mayor c.f Transconaandlisten to his admonitions; a man of considerable stature who has never in the past been reluctant to put forth his position in spite of the many established interests in his community or for that matter in the province and I suggest that in this case again that the Minister of Labour listen to the mayor of his own city which he represents. Mr. Speaker, there is one other area which I wish to discuss. It's an area that has been avoided to a considerable extent, and that is the question of the forestry complex development at The Pas. I must say that from the out-start that I think the government has made a great mistake in the moves that they have brought about in forcing this company into receivership. I listened to the Member for The Pas yesterday when he spoke and I think he made a very telling statement when he said that the whole development at The Pas was a marginal develop ment. Mr. Speaker, no one has ever said that it wasn't, and if the Member for The Pas has just discovered in 1971 that it was anything but a marginal development it's no wonder that the government is in trouble if that s the interpretation that the government caucus is putting on to this project. Mr. Speaker, I say that the government has made a mistake. They found that the people that were heading up The Pas complex were very difficult to deal with. They are hard-headed people, they had to be to make it go. What the government has not realized is that the hard-headed approach of the people they were dealing with, almost ruthless at times, are the same characteristics that allow that complex to succeed in an area, a market area outside of Manitoba. I suggest to you that there are not enough business people on the government side to realize that they are in a tough league and if they are suggesting in their decision that somehow a civil servant is going to be able to sell pulp on the American market and on the other competitive markets of the world, at a... arrangement that is going to yield them the result they want, then they are badly mistaken. I think they have made a mistake again, because I am slightly familiar with the, had reason to be familiar at one stage with the agreement that they have with the company that has developed this, and I think that they are going to have great difficulty in making their point. I think they are going to lose and when they do lose it is going to be very costly to the people of Manitoba. I believe that after that has happened, that the principles involved in this are going to come back and they are going to make it work. Now that s leading with a political chin, because I full well realize that politically the best decision on The Pas would be to turn your back on it before it ever happens but in terms of the economics of Manitoba the develop ment at The Pas is in the best interests of Manitoba, and that the agreement that was made despite some of the intricacies that have caused presumably great concern to the government that in overall terms it was in the best economic interest of the Province of Manitoba, and if the decision had to be made again, I am sure that this government may not make it because I don't think they have the courage. I don't think they have the courage, they have not got the philosophy I know, and I think the reason they are in the trouble that they are in now, or that all of Manitoba is in the trouble it is in now, is because of the difference again in philosophy, but your philosophy I submit to you, Mr. Speaker, I submit that the philosophy of the present government has got them in a lot of trouble because they are going to have a great deal of difficulty winning this and they are going to have a great deal of difficulty settling for the penalty clauses that are in that contract that go beyond April lst. If you can impose a penalty on that company for not having that thing in operation by April lst, a penalty of $5, OOO a day, then I suspect that you have to be prepared to pay that penalty, or the citizens of Manitoba are
8 l'z4 April 16, 1971 (MR. CRAIK cont'd. )..... going to have to pay that back if you do not win. And I don't think you are going to win, I repeat. But I think the complex is going to run and it 's going to run a:ft er your nose is a lot bloodier than it is now because you have made a bad decision and you are in trouble. It 's not the previous government that's in trouble on this one my friend, you are in great difficulty. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Mines and Natural Resources. MR. GREEN: I wonder if the honourable member would permit a question? The honourable member has indicated that he do esn't think that this government would make a decision of that kind if they had it to do again. May I ask the honourable member if the decision had to be made again by himself would he make the same decision to proceed in the way they proceeded in 1966? MR. CRAIK: Mr. Speaker, I wasn't party to the decision in '66, but if I was faced with it today, urider the same circumstances, I can say that I very likely would, very likely would,.and the previous government would have made it work. It's the present government that got it into difficulty. So, Mr. Speaker, what do we have now? We have an investigating committee and I think that this as well is pretty symbolic, the make-up of it is pretty symbolic of the present go vernment. Is there an accountant on it? No. Is there an engineer on it that knows anything about the pulp business? No. Is there a businessman on it that know s anything about it? No. Who's on it, Mr. Speaker? The law partner of the Minister of Mines, a political scientist from the University and a retired judge and these people are to analyze a complex busfoess such as this and come out with an answer. Are we really expecting -- (Interjection) -- no, I prefer to wait. I'll very gladly answer you at the end. Mr. Speaker, we are not going to get satisfactory answers on that basis, but the go vernment is, as I said, is reflective. It 's symbolic of what their philosophy is. It' s symbolic of their proneness to make political appointment. It's not in the best interests of Manitoba. An enquiry commission of peopl e that are made up that know absolutely nothing about the business that they are investigating. And if you want to take it as a personal criticism of the members you are free to do so. All I'm saying is that if you were serving the best interests of Manitoba and you wanted to inquire into this, and I welcome you to, why could you not put somebody on it that is first of all removed from the political connection and secondly had some particular expertise in the area that they are investigat ing. But what else do we get? The Minister of Education says higher expertise. Well Mr. Speaker, it's no wonder that the Premier has a headache with the sort of guidance that he is getting from the people that he has working with him. They know absolutely nothing about the area in which they are dealing: their philosophy is wrong and in order to justify their philosophy, they have had to take other action to do it. But you are in trouble, Mr. Speaker. I shouldn't say you, I don't believe you are. The government is in trouble on this one and they are not going to get out of it easily. However, I'm convinced that The Pas complex is going to progress in spite of them. They have very successfully managed to cloud the issue to the extent of persuading the people at this stage of the game, that it was a very bad giveaway on behalf of the people of Mallitoba and they were not prepared to give the whole complex a chance to show itself in its best light after April lst, they have prevented that move. I suggest to you, Mr. Speaker, that their mistakes are going to catch up with them and I trust that this is done before they decide they're going to go to the next election. I suggest to you that it is in the best interests to have this decided in the courts outside of Manitoba with the political influence that is fiercely going on between the Cabinet members and the courts in Manitoba at this particular time. Mr. Speaker, I want to finish off by suggesting to the government that they follow through with some changes in their poiicies with regard to the economic development of Manitoba. We have found that great ch::i,_nges have been going on in the Manitoba Development Corporation, the biggest changes is the increase in staff. We have found that in the matter of two years the staff of the MDF has gone from a staff of less than ten people, seven or eight or nine, to a staff of over 40 people today, This was not pointed out by the Minister of Industry and Commerce in his many remarks, however, I think it 's important to the people of Manitoba to know that the several hundred percent increase in the staff of the Development Corporation has been the greatest economic development that Manitoba has seen so far and that we re all waiting anxiously to see that this pays off. The annual report which we now have tells us nothing except that there has been growth in the past year. I trust, also, that the Manitoba Development Corporation will be kept at the arm's length from the government that it has in the past even though it has caused some embarrassing I I
9 April 16, (MR, CRAIK cont'd.)..... situations for the government. However, all the indications are that the Minister is most anxious to operate it directly as the right arm of his department and certainly not at arm's length ; and I suggest that we are expecting great things from him and his staff of 43 people that he has now built up in the MDC and that this is not the only signs we have of economic development in Manitoba. MR. SPEAKER: Does the Honourable Minister of Mines and Natural Resources wish a question? MR, GREEN: Yes, I wonder if the honourable member would submit to a question? Did the honourable member approve of the Inquiry Commission and its personnel that was designated to look into the Brandon Packers' dispute in 19, approximately 63? MR, SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Riel. MR. CRAIK: Mr. Speaker, I would like to answer the Minister if I could but I don't really see how he expects me to be familiar with the Brandon Packers' Inquiry when I wasn't - I think I was in the Province of Manitoba at that time and had some familiarity with it, but I'm hardly prepared to take the responsibility -- whatever it was. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Mines. MR. GREEN: If I advise the Honourable Minister that the then Conservative Government appointed Mr. Justice Tritschler to head the inquiry and.. MR, SPEAKER: Order please. MR. GREEN: I am putting the question, Mr. Speaker. MR, SPEAKER: Well you are stating an argument first. MR. GREEN: May I ask the honourable member, may I ask the honourable member whether he considers that the appointment of Chief Justice Tritschler as the head of the inquiry and Maurice Arpin who was a special consultant to the Premier as solicitor for the inquiry, whether he considered those good appointments? MR. CRAIK: Mr, Speaker, I can't resist the answer... MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Riel. MR, CRAIK: I've never yet run across a lawyer, and often politicians, that look for precedents when they're trying to justify a position and the Minister of Mines and Natural Resources has fallen beautifully into that pattern. He wants to look to some -- probably important case at that time but obscure now as far as the importance in terms of Manitoba is concerned to try and justify a situation that now exists in Manitoba. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Industry and Commerce. MR, EVANS: Thank you very much, Mr, Speaker. I would first join with my colleagues in the House in congratulating you on your elevation to this very high office, this very important position in the Manitoba Legislature. I know you will do well in upholding the traditions of the office of Speaker ; I know that you are a most conscientious person and have a great sense of fair play and I would take this opportunity to wish you well in your position and in the tasks before you, Although there has been quite a bit of discussion with respect to economic development and economic situation in the Province of Manitoba during the Throne Debate I do not wish to -- and I could rebut a number of the comments being made -- I don't wish to go into this in any great detail. I would like to, Mr. Speaker, however, take a few minutes to relate to one or two economic factors that the Province of Manitoba must face. The fact of the matter is we are one province, we are one economic unit or one economic segment in a national economy, we are part of an international economy and that if we have a Federal Government which is insisting on carrying forth a very tight monetary policy, we have a Federal Government in Ottawa which is insisting on fighting inflation by the creation of vast amounts of unemployment, if we have a government in Ottawa which insists in curtailing substantial expenditures in the Province of Manitoba then the task facing any government in Manitoba becomes very difficult in the process of economic development. The task of promoting economic development becomes very difficult indeed if the circumstances and the situation that is created by the Federal Government is one which is not conducive to economic development. Indeed the Government of Manitoba has had to spend a great deal of time and energy in fighting the unemployment situation that has confronted us and I like to think, Mr, Speaker, that Manitoba has probably had the most imaginative program to combat unemployment of any province in the good nation of ours. We have speeded up public works, we have engaged in a high level of spending on public housing although this spending is worthwhile within itself, but nevertheless it did have the very good side effect of stimulating work in the province, And I would also mention the provincial
10 176 April 16, 1971 (MR. EVANS cont'd. )..... employment program for municipalities, a program which has been. hailed by all municipalities in the Province of Manitoba, by civic leaders from east to west from north to south for the types of work that have been made available in various communities large and small around the province during this winter and indeed at thls very time and in through to the middle of our summer, the time when unemployment tends to be hlgher than in other seasons of the year. And because of these very strenuous efforts on the part of the Provincial Government, we indeed have kept the levels of unemployment lower than the Canadian average and the results of our programs were particularly noticed in the latest statement on unemployment which was released by the Federal Government the other day and which was referred to by my colleague, the Honourable Minister of Labour, in Ws statement of yesterday. The fact of the matter is, however, that the Canadian unemployment situation still looks very grim indeed, that we have a level of unemployment of 7. 8 percent of those who are willing and able to work in Canada, whlch is a percentage figure representing about 650, OOO people in Canada who are out of work and who want to work, and that thls level of unemployment is probably the hlghest and the worst since the dirty thirties of the major depression suffered here. I would forecast, Mr. Speaker, that there is a dismal year ahead for Canada and for the Canadian economy and that it's not unlikely that high levels of unemployment will be with us on the Canadian average again next winter, and I think that our fears, the fears expressed by representatives of thls government about the duration as well as the depth of this recession are being realized. The statistics indicate that it is not only a deep recession that we're in but if looks like it's going to be a very long recession. At the same time, the fears expressed by our government with respect to inflation are also being realized because inflation apparently is returning and in fact I would suggest that the whole Ottawa program in maintaining adequate levels of employment and in curtailing inflation is a complete disaster. Our government is cognizant of the seriousness of the situation and we are analyzing the situation very carefully as it applies to Manitoba and we trust that we can use the experience gained over this past winter for perhaps better and more sophlsticated programs in years or seasons ahead. The situation in Manitoba, because of the increased level of spending by the Province of Manitoba for public housing, the stepped up program of public works and because of our PEP program for municipalities has shown that while the amount of unemployment in Alberta and Saskatchewan has increased in March over February by 5, OOO people -- in other words in March there were 5, OOO more people unemployed in Alberta and Saskatchewan taken together than in February -- at the same time Manitoba s level of unemployment decreased by 2, OOO persons, so that this being reflected in the rate whlch shows us having one of the most favourable rates of unemployment of any province in Canada. I might also add a footnote, and that is with regard to the participation rates. The participation rate tells you what proportion of our potential work force is ready and available to work, and the fact is during times of serious economic difficulties there is an inclination for people to leave the labour force; in some cases older persons, some cases married women and in some cases others who have just given up the thought of ever getting a job so they don't participate in effect, or not available to participate effect in the labour force. The fact of the matter is that the participation rates in Canada have fallen by a percentage point so that there are 16, OOO people less available in the Canadian labour force in March as compared with the previous month, whereas in Manitoba the participation rate has remained constant. In other words, there hasn't been the same escapage of persons who have given up the thought or the hope of becoming employed in Manitoba as has occurred on the national average. And I repeat, Mr. Speaker, that Manitoba s worries about the lack of vigorous Federal response are being realized and I'm just afraid that the lack of action in Ottawa is going to increasingly throw the burden onto the shoulders of progressive provinces such as the Province of Manitoba, to throw it on our own resources in fighting unemployment with our limited abilities of taxation and our limited resources, so that in effeet they will be contributing to the Balcanization of our country. I haven't meant to dwell as long as I have done on unemployment. I have said that the unemployment situation is not as good as we d like it to be; we think that we should have lower levels. The ideal unemployment situation is zero unemployment. At the same time, there are other statistics that indicate that the situation in Manitoba is comparing favourably with that across Canada. Whether you look at average weekly wages, whether you look at real wages, whether you look at retail sales changes or a host of other statistics, would indicate